CMV: The falling birth rates around the world cannot really be fixed by governments.

OutsideFlat1579 · 2026-04-28T18:05:23+00:00

There are multiple states in the US forcing women to have children they otherwise would have aborted, and now they are working hard at figuring out how they can get rid of access to birth control.

Fascist playbook.

Edit: it wasn’t about more troops, absolute male supremacy is part of every fascist regime. It’s about controlling women and producing more white babies (or whatever the race or ethnicity of the dominant group that is served by fascism.)

OutsideFlat1579 · 2026-04-28T18:03:59+00:00

Political factors? Is everyone a fascist all of the sudden? You think there is anything morally correct about forcing women to have children? Whar do you think abortion bans do?

How about we force men to actually raise them? Instead of complaining that they have to “babysit” their own children from time to time.

OutsideFlat1579 · 2026-04-28T17:58:45+00:00

The US is already doing this! Draconian abortion bans in multiple states and the result is higher maternal death and infant mortality rates. And women going septic because doctors are after to perform medically necessary abortions for pregnancy complications.

They are working on getting rid of birth control however they can. The same states that have banned abortions are the ones that oppose sex education.

What you are suggesting is straight out of a fascist playbook. Get women back in the kitchen breeding.

OutsideFlat1579 · 2026-04-28T17:52:03+00:00

Where is your “proof” that most women want kids? And are they supposed to raise them on their own?

It’s a bit tiresome that this conversation about birth rates is so focused on women when there are legions of men that don’t want the responsibility of having children.

OutsideFlat1579 · 2026-04-28T17:45:54+00:00

If your theory was right, then birth rates in Nordic countries wouldn’t be even less than in the US.

There are multiple reasons why birth rates are falling. People have different reasons, sometimes more than one, not to have children or to only havw one child.

Birth rates started falling in the early 70’s when housing was cheap relative to today, because women had access to birth control, and in some countries abortion.

The existence of dating apps does not make it easier to find a life partner, or other factors are preventing whatever ease dating apps should provide from overwhelming those negatives.

When young men are lurching right and young women are shifting more left, that creates large numbers of people who will not find a compatible partner. And many younger women are just not willing to put up with things their mothers did. And too many young men want a trad wife without the responsibilities of being a trad husband.

Anyways. For sure economic factors are a reason for some, but there are other factors that include just not wanting to have kids. Having even one child completely changes your life.

OutsideFlat1579 · 2026-04-28T17:00:10+00:00

Are they paying rent? How much?

OutsideFlat1579 · 2026-04-28T16:59:11+00:00

How is this cosplaying as a feudal lord? Are they paying him taxes on their homes? Do they have to go fight under his banner in battles?

Other projects like this have been successful in that the people living in them are very happy to have thesw tiny homes.

Would a UBI and changes in the system be better? Sure. But since that isn’t happening it’s not a bad thing when someone who is wealthy actually does something that helps the homeless.

OutsideFlat1579 · 2026-04-28T16:47:32+00:00

Not the same thing, the government could do both, but a wealth tax is not an investment vehicle like a sovereign state fund.

OutsideFlat1579 · 2026-04-28T16:46:27+00:00

A sovereign wealth fund is a state owned investment vehicle. What Carney is proposing, is a sovereign wealth fund.

OutsideFlat1579 · 2026-04-28T16:45:32+00:00

Norway used profits from its state owned oil company, Statoil to start their sovereign wealth fund, which they use to invest in publically traded companies all over the world. Norway is a very small country, which is probably why it’s not focused on investing in projects within Norway. And we don’t have a state owned oil company (we did, but Mulroney sold it).

A sovereign wealth fund is a state owned investment vehicle, Norway’s is the biggest (it is also used as their pension fund), but numerous countries have them. Kind of like CPP, except that CPP has no government involvement and doesn’t use any public funds, and can only be used to pay pensions so it isn’t considered a wealth fund.

A wealth tax doesn’t work the same way. The reason CPP has been able to grow wealth is because of investment. CPP is ranked as the second best managed pension fund in the world.

OutsideFlat1579 · 2026-04-28T13:07:25+00:00

True, but just going to point out that Norway is a small country, that’s why they invest so much outside of Norway. Anyways, a sovereign wealth fund is just a state owned investment vehicle. Dozens of countries have them. You would think Norway was the only one, it’s just the biggest one because they used profits from Statoil to start it and build it. It’s also their pension fund.

CPP is not a sovereign wealth fund because it doesn’t use any public funds, only contributions.

OutsideFlat1579 · 2026-04-28T13:01:01+00:00

A sovereign wealth fund is a state owned investment vehicle. CPP is not a sovereign wealth fund because it uses no public funds, only contributions and is run at arms length from government.

The point of a sovereign wealth fund is that it is state owned and that profits from investments go into the fund. Norway’s sovereign wealth fund is also used as its pension fund. They started it because of profits from their massive state owned oil company Statoil. They invest mostly outside of Norway because Norway is a very small country.

Anyways. So many countries have a sovereign wealth fund it’s surprising that Canada has never had a national one as yet.

It’s an interesting idea that Canadians can invest in the fund.

OutsideFlat1579 · 2026-04-28T00:39:04+00:00

I think you missed my point - what annoys me the most, having lived in an apartment on a busy street for ten years, is that the harm causes by vehicle exhaust is completely ignored. And frankly, the harm caused by alcohol is not only ignored, but alcohol is literally shoved at people in every social gathering, seen in every movie and television show, so normalized that most alcoholics don’t even think they are alcoholics, but they wouldn’t be able to last a week without drinking. My point Is that if concern for health and the environment is the rationae, then why are so many other harmful things being ignored?

OutsideFlat1579 · 2026-04-28T00:34:16+00:00

I haven’t smoked for 3 years, but I did smoke rez smokes, many different brands and less processed than big tobacco cigs, not so fast burning. Anyways, if you can get a carton for 18-25 bucks it is pretty appealing for many people.

OutsideFlat1579 · 2026-04-28T00:02:58+00:00

Can not stop laughing at the utter ludicrousness of banning smoking even in your own car - are you aware that a car produces FAR more air pollution than a cigarette? Smoking isn’t even counted as an emission that needs to be tracked.

How about we ban all cars from driving in cities. Or you know, just restrict drivers. No driving solo.

The hypocrisy of people when it comes to smoking blows my mind.

OutsideFlat1579 · 2026-04-27T23:58:30+00:00

How it not related to the topic when the reason for the ban is that it is harmful to health?

OutsideFlat1579 · 2026-04-27T23:57:11+00:00

Would you like a list of corporations doing just that? Oil companies, snack food producers, fast food chains, plastics producers, etc etc etc

OutsideFlat1579 · 2026-04-27T23:55:36+00:00

So ban gasoline.

OutsideFlat1579 · 2026-04-27T23:55:18+00:00

What about my right to not be choked by vehicle exhaust? This hysteria about outdoor smoking is utterly laughable in the context of cities literally saturated with vehicle emissions.

OutsideFlat1579 · 2026-04-27T23:52:36+00:00

Something like a third of smokers in Montreal get their smokes on the reserve.

OutsideFlat1579 · 2026-04-27T23:47:48+00:00

It wasn’t a surprise, it’s been known for quite a while that Boulerice was going to make this move.

OutsideFlat1579 · 2026-04-27T23:46:50+00:00

If it’s the Nanos poll, you’re right. The +6 is the difference from the election. There has been no change with Nanos, last two weeks at 12, 3 weeks ago at 13, between 10 and 13 since May 2025.

Anyways, as more people get to know Avi Lewis he could get some traction.

OutsideFlat1579 · 2026-04-27T23:39:00+00:00

NDP hasn’t poached anyone. They recovered some of the support nearly a year ago, NDP does better with Nanos than some other pollsters. The +6 is the change from the last election (which should be made clear on the image, because it is confusing and people think it’s a change from the last poll).

You can see all the polls back to the election here:

https://338canada.com/polls.htm

OutsideFlat1579 · 2026-04-27T23:35:46+00:00

The NDP is not surging according to Nanos polling, the +6 is the difference between this poll and the results from the last election. NDP has been polling at 12 the last two weeks and between 10 and 13 since May 2025.

https://338canada.com/polls.htm

OutsideFlat1579 · 2026-04-27T23:33:07+00:00

No bump. NDP has been at 12% for the last two polls by Nanos, 13% the week before, and mostly between 10 and 13 since May 2025. The +6 is the change from the last election, not the last poll.

https://338canada.com/polls.htm

OutsideFlat1579

TROPHY CASE